Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Why so many 2 hump camels in Arabian Movies?


FredCDobbs
 Share

Recommended Posts

This has irritated me for some time.

 

Movies that show Central Asian 2-hump camels in films about Arabia.

 

Everyone knows that the Arabian camels are Dromedarys and not Bactrians.

 

Seems that there must have been a much bigger supply of the 2-humps in the Hollywood area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What made me start thinking about this was when I heard that the producers and director of the first major Tarzan film got all upset when they realized that all the elephants they had rented were Indian elephants, while African elephants have larger ears.

 

So they made a bunch of large artificial ears to put on the Indian elephants.

 

I thought that was totally unnecessary. Who knows and who cares about the size of elephant's ears in a jungle movie?

 

But when it comes to one or two humps, now THERE is a BIG difference. Yet most of the 1930s and 40s Arabian movies use 2-hump Asian camels, instead of 1-hump Arabian camels. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Camels have a very strong Union, Fred, and one of their hardest fought for rules in their contract negotiations was that they only work on Wednesdays, otherwise known in the workforce as.........

 

(...yeah, I know...you were way ahead of me there, weren't ya)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't sweat it, Lavender. Ya see it's perfectly understandable that Fred would have misunderstood your post's intent...seein' as how I'm pretty sure he has me on his "ignore" function now!!!

 

LOL

 

(...though I suppose we'll soon see if my supposition is correct here, huh!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another thing!

 

Contractions WERE used by people in average speech in the 19th Century, unlike what is heard in the new movie TRUE GRIT, which has no contractions in the dialogue.

 

Note: A contraction is like "I don't know", instead of "I do not know", and "I'm going to town" instead of "I am going to town."

 

No-contractions in dialogue were often used in formal writing and in some novels, but in the spoken language, even the most educated and intelligent person uses contractions while speaking, and even moreso in the 19th Century. Mark Twain even mentioned this in some of his books.

 

I learned in the news business that reporters often "clean up" public speaker's speeches, when quoting them, by removing all their contractions when they speak without reading a written text, speaking in just normal conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}

>

> Contractions WERE used by people in average speech in the 19th Century, unlike what is heard in the new movie TRUE GRIT, which has no contractions in the dialogue.

>

>

>

I know what you're saying, but as for TRUE GRIT, that's how Charles Portis wrote the original novel. So speaking that way is keeping true to the author's words. Although not to that extreme, there's a fair amount of that style of dialogue in the John Wayne version too, especially by Mattie and La Boeuf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, how the heck did this thread go from bein' about "Camels" to bein' about "Contractions"???

 

Well, that IS course unless its about the BIRTH of LITTLE camels, anyway!

 

(...though once again I'm gettin' the very strong feelin' that I won't be gettin' an answer to my query here...well, at least from the Fred anyway!)

 

LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

*Re: Why so many 2 hump camels in Arabian Movies?*

 

My guess: If I was a producer knowing that the camels had to be ridden by inexperienced extras, I would assume the two hump variety would be a safer ride and present less risk of someone falling off during a shoot. It would be easier to saddle up between humps (rather than sit on top of one), plus you would have the front hump to hold onto just in case the ride got bumpy!

 

Delays in shooting, as well as the spoiling of shoots due to accidents gets frightfully expensive to a film production company!

 

 

speakthelma.gif

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well Fred, the incorrect use of regional specific animals has always bothered me too. Unlike you however, it extends beyond camels....the wrong use of elephants bother me immensely. The differences between African and Asian elephants is not just in the size of ears, but the shape of the ears, the , the dome of the head and the sloping back the Asian species have, as opposed to the lower forehead and the sway back the African species has. Likewise, when New World monkeys used in movies taking place in the old world, or jaguars for leopards in the same situation, and vice versa. my guess is wharever was expedient, available and/or trained in Hollywood was what was used. another gripe (which, btw Dargo, is why Fred went into contractions), is the use of dry California scenery for almost every type of lush location around the world. Again, it was what was available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another thing.....

 

The movie Hollow Triumph, with Paul Henreid, irritates me because there are some errors in the plot and the dialogue.

 

Keep in mind that Henreid murders a doctor who looks like him, and that doctor has a scar on his left cheek.

 

In Hollow Triumph, Paul Henreid makes a scar on his own right cheek, so he can impersonate the doctor, but he puts the scar on the wrong side of his own face.

 

To do this, he looks in a mirror while looking at a photograph of the doctor who has a scar on the left side of his face, and in the photo, the scar shows up on the right side of the photograph, which correctly shows that the scar on the doctors left cheek.

 

In error, and because of the mirror, while looking at the photo, Henreid puts his new scar on the right side of his own face, and he sees his scar on the right side of his own image in the mirror. And of course the doctors scar is shown on the right side of his image in the photograph.

 

Then, later at the photo store, the printer tells his partner he had the photo negative flipped by mistake while making the print, and thus the scar changed sides in the print. He said, "This way, the scar is on the left side of the face instead of being on the right."

 

Well, the scar on the doctor really IS on the left side of his face, instead of the right, so this dialogue at the photo store makes absolutely no sense.

 

The error made by Henreid was made because he looked at the photo to see the doctors scar, which is seen on the right side of the photo on the left side of the doctors face, but Henreid looked in the mirror to see where to put his own scar and he put it on the right side of his face, which is seen on the right side of his image in the mirror.

 

When we look at both the photo and the mirror image at the same time, the new scar seems to be on the correct side of the face, but it isn't, because a photo shows a real image of a person, while a mirror shows a flipped (left to right) image of a person.

 

Later, Henreid sees the doctor up close and realizes the scar is on the left side of the doctor's face, while Henreid put his own new scar on the right side of his own face.

 

He goes on to impersonate the doctor, thinking that no one would notice the difference.

 

The dialogue in the photo store is wrong and out of place. It is not needed. The error was caused by the mirror, not a flipped photo. If the photo had really been flipped, then Henreid would have put his scar on the (correct) left side of his own face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Do you suppose they did this delibertely to get the viewers attention and confuse them even more ?

 

Well, I thought of that, and that's possible, but the real "flipping" of the image was done in the mirror, and the screen writer and director could have just as easily explaned that.

 

I saw a film recently about a teenager who wrote her nickname on her forehead while looking in a mirror at a teen party, and she wrote it so she could read it properly, but when she got up and left the mirror we could see she had written her name backwards, because of the flipped mirror image that she had used while writing the name.

 

But I suppose all non-photographers in the movie audience fell for the "flipped photo negative" story without realizing the real reason for the scar being on the wrong side was because of the "flipped mirror image" phenomenon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...